The next Lisp has to rename all occurrences of
Of course, Ruby does it wrong, but at least it's trying hard. And I think Ruby's semi-stateful, semi-functional programming model is the right way forward. For most internet apps, that is. We'll be programming crash-only (err...), event-driven servers most of the time anyway. For that kind of programming, Lisp is just right.
The original "LISP genotype" is junk DNA.
McCarthy's original LISP, you know the one built from CONS, CAR, CDR, QUOTE, etc has nothing interesting to tell us today. Clinging to or idolizing this model is the sign of a misunderstanding. Modern Lisps have nothing to do with this (flawed) historical model.
The cons is a relic.
I repeat, relic.
Think of the experts.
Instead of accommodating n00bs, the next Lisp should follow CL's model and be a language for experts, one that you grow into over the years.
For the type of programming done usually in Lisp, Smalltalk-style object-orientation is the jolly good icing on the cake. While that programming is arguably stone-age compared to Haskell, there's no need for Haskell envy. Haskell hasn't yet developed to the point where Haskell is the world's finest Lisp.
More: Steps towards an Acceptable Lisp.